The conflict between history and faith, or the separation of Christianity from history has been a great concern of modern theology. Based on source hypothesis and literal criticism, modern liberalists are trying to eliminate the suspected mythical elaboration in the gospels and reconstruct the historical Jesus. The problem is that it implies Christianity is to a certain extent a theological invention by early church, though some modernist like Marcus Borg thought that it makes no difference to his Christian faith.
Philosophical theism or theological exhortation has never influenced the world so powerfully as Christianity has. Gospel means "good news", i.e. information about something that has happened. Historical reconstruction of Jesus fails in trying to separate the divinity and humanity of Jesus; such separation is impossible because divinity and humanity are too closely interwoven to be differentiated in a clear-cut manner.
The historical evidences amounted only to probability or plausibility, which is the best that history can do, but probability or plausibility is at least sufficient for putting our experience into trial. Christian faith cannot do without history, otherwise our faith will have no reference for being put into test. Instead, our spiritual experience adds to history that directness and intimacy of faith which deliver us from fear. This is why phenomenal conflict or tension between history and faith is necessary for maintaining the dialogue between faith and reality.
Reference: The Princeton Theological Review, Vol. 13
No comments:
Post a Comment